Evaluation of patients’ anxiety and perceptions toward dental imaging modalities: a cross-sectional study

The aim of this study was to evaluate patients’ anxiety and perceptions regarding periapical radiography, panoramic radiography, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and ultrasonography, and to examine the differences among these modalities from the patient’s perspective. This cross-sectional survey included a total of 282 patients aged 18 years and older who presented to the Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology Clinic at the Faculty of Dentistry, Giresun University. Data were collected using a three-section questionnaire. The questionnaire included sociodemographic questions, 15 items assessing general perceptions and attitudes toward dental imaging, and 8 modality-specific items repeated for periapical radiography, panoramic radiography, CBCT, and ultrasonography. The modality-specific items assessed anxiety, perceived harm, physical discomfort, concern about repeated imaging, tendency to avoid the procedure, perceived diagnostic benefit, perceived safety, and preference for an alternative modality. Data were collected through face-to-face administration. Statistical comparisons among the imaging modalities were performed using the Friedman test, with Bonferroni-corrected Wilcoxon signed-rank tests applied for post hoc pairwise comparisons. Comparisons between independent groups according to educational level and gender were performed using the Mann–Whitney U test. The mean age of the participants was 32.9 ± 10.8 years; 50.7% were female and 49.3% were male. Significant differences were found among imaging modalities in anxiety, perceived harm, physical discomfort, concern about repeated imaging, and avoidance tendency (all p < 0.001), with CBCT generally receiving the least favorable evaluations. Preference for an alternative modality also differed significantly ( p = 0.012), whereas perceived diagnostic benefit ( p = 0.767) and safety ( p = 0.162) did not. Educational-level and gender-based differences were largely non-significant. Although patients generally considered dental imaging necessary, their perceptions varied across different modalities. CBCT showed the least favorable perceptions overall, while ultrasonography also received less favorable evaluations than panoramic and periapical radiography in some domains. These findings indicate that patient perceptions may vary across imaging modalities and cannot be explained solely by the presence or absence of ionizing radiation.